EXCERPTS FROM GORBACHEV'S RESPONDING SPEECH

December 21, 1990

MOSCOW, DEC. 20 -- Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev spoke to the Congress of People's Deputies after the resignation of Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze. Following are excerpts, translated by the Associated Press:

I would not like either to simplify the situation or overdramatize it. It's most important not to fall into panic, and especially hysterics. And not to slip into accusations that will make us all feel ashamed tomorrow. The situation that has emerged is really very serious. It really is the culmination -- a certain, so to speak, situation has emerged here, that, in fact, we ought to try and understand . . . .

I will tell you, for me the statement by Eduard Amvrosiyevich {Shevardnadze} about his resignation was unexpected, and that, frankly speaking, is what hurts me most.

The talks I had {with him} on the telephone -- and there have been two -- do not yet enable me to make a full evaluation of the reasons for the decision he made. We have agreed that we need to get together, sit down and talk and discuss everything. And I would not dot the i's and pass a verdict on many issues starting with unequivocal condemnation of Shevardnadze's step. I think all this should be thought over, and I will try to say a couple of words and explain why. Or conversely, to ask {him}, despite everything. All this needs to be thought over.

What he said here and in my two telephone talks tells me that Eduard Amvrosiyevich Shevardnadze decided with the help of such a step, a protest, to come out against those who are trying to take advantage of the difficulties and question the course directed toward perestroika, on the main directions of struggle to reach the goals of perestroika and the renewal of the society.

And since, as he thinks, this offensive has assumed the character of a planned offensive and uninterrupted assaults, {he} must resort to the sharpest forms in order to break the attacks against the implementation of this course and stop those who wish to take advantage of the acute situation and push us off course. Those are the arguments he outlined both here and to me. Because, after all {it is not in} his personal interests.

I share this position in the sense that we must defend perestroika -- I stated the thesis outright that it is the main task of our Congress as I see it in the real situation in which it proceeds when we all, the entire society, have reached the limit. We must either confirm our choice or alter the course. In essence, the issue is such.

Differences in tactical decisions, in the rates of perestroika -- those, after all, are processes of life, a matter of search, agreement. I said then that we must defend this course despite all costs, miscalculations, errors that have resulted in difficult consequences and for which {we} must bear responsibility. I am not evading responsibility, but I can see responsibility above all in bringing this course to its logical conclusion, so that it brings positive results for the entire society.

Personally, I condemn Comrade Shevardnadze for acting so without consulting with the president -- even more, I will tell you directly, since matters have reached this point: My plans included recommending Comrade Shevardnadze for vice president. This is what the situation is like. That is dotting the i's.

I did not decide this for nothing. This man made his choice long ago that we can no longer live in the kind of society in which we used to live. Confronting it as long as 10 years ago in a situation you know, he entered into the confrontation with certain forces. We knew about it and those who were near know all this well. He, like me, working in {other} regions and here, came to the conclusion that even possessing the powers that we had, we were unable to really unfold the processes. {Life} demanded that we go through all the trials, all the keen discussions -- they were not public then -- to come {to the understanding} that we must take every chance to begin changing everything in the society. He belongs to such a people. . . .

Of course, each of us plays his role. For those of my colleagues who joined it, and so to speak, made their choice from the first days, even before 1985, now, perhaps, is the most difficult time. But it is unforgivable to leave at such a moment. This must be condemned. . . .

Let's not confuse things. We can see the state of our society, the political instability, the war of laws, the inefficiency of the executive power, gaps within it, etc., and this calls for immediate urgent measures to introduce order, strengthen discipline, to introduce tolerance into our society without which we cannot proceed with our transformations, and we have just reached the critical mark in those transformations.

And please remember that many dozens of states had to go through such stages when they found themselves in this state at this or that period of their history and they always called for a strong power. If you have jelly you can eat too much of it and even gag on it. I can feel that what we have now is jelly-like power. It is not acceptable. . . .

And that does not mean talking about any dictatorship, but about strong power. And let's not confuse these things. Because it would mean substituting one notion for another. Because the president now does not have information -- and I get extensive information -- that someone somewhere is preparing a junta or some other similar dictatorship, etc. No. I do not have such information.

But if we are irresponsible, careless, if we do not listen to impulses coming from the society and miss the opportunity to strengthen our power and make it more dynamic, then, of course, the time may come when the society will start searching for solutions along those routes. We must be aware of it. These are the lessons of history. So all this is interconnected. And in this connection I reject Comrade Shevardnadze's thesis, because it smacks a little of panic. . . .